Because of a guarrenteed hard drive in every PS3, a part of GTAIV can be installed onto thehard drive to give the PS3 version less pop-in, better draw distance and better anti-aliasing. wheras only the people who pay an aditional amount will get a hard drive with their 360 so rockstar can't allow the game to be installed with the 360, which makes the 360s version perform less awesome than the PS3 version. I think exclusive content is nothing, rockstar have a strong bond with sony and will probably release another set of DLC for the PS3 version. sure, it could be different content, but at least it would be something to rub in microsofts 50million dollar face

 How is it anti-Sony.? 

isn't PS2 has set standard...

or isn't PS3 still has very very few million sellers compared to other console.?

or isn't the PS3 graphics for most of the multiplatform games worst.?

or isn't developer are dropping PS3 games before of inherent complexity of programming and low market penetration of PS3.?

hasn't almost 1 and a half yr has passed for the PS3 release and it is still not looking to catch XBOX... 

Do you think the creator of PS1 and PS2 should be happy with these result..

i m sure i wouldn;t be if i be the chairman of Sony....

It is just like saying that Toyota should be happy as long as they r selling better than Kia or Hyundai.. 

just so you all know, this thread is a month old.

 1. Yes, Sony set the standard for dominance.  And PS3 is barely behind PS2 sales at the same point in its life cycle (less than 200k behind, i think)

2. Attach rate is like 4.5 for PS3 and 7.5 for 360 WW, right?  And PS3 is a year newer, and proportionally more PS3 sales have come more recently.

3. Not anymore.  PS3 has the edge more than half the time now, I'd say.  PS3 isn't appreciably behind anymroe, that's for sure.  Cell unlocked, but far from mastered.

4. Not really.

5. It's starting to catch UP, and sales are accelerating, while 360s...not so much.

6. Yes.  (see #1 and add in Blu-Ray royalties over the next 10 years). 

7. Why dwell on impossibilities?

8.  Just as long as we agree that MS is Kia, Nintendo is Hyundai with a shitload more sales and coolness, and Sony is Toyota.

Only when you don't adjust for the fact that the PS2 was out in Japan only for 7 months. When you Align launches by region instead of world wide you see the PS3 is actually very behind the PS2 everywhere.

Edit: Charts for Proof.  (With 360 thrown in)

Japan 

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?cons1=PS2&reg1=Japan&cons2=PS3&reg2=Japan&cons3=X360&reg3=Japan&weeks=156

Europe

http://vgchartz.com/hwlaunch.php?cons1=PS2&reg1=Europe&cons2=PS3&reg2=Europe&cons3=X360&reg3=Europe&weeks=156

USA

heres a thought if the ps3 was made by microsoft and the x360 made by sony. then the x360 would have shifted alot more consoles. you would be suprised what the PS sony brand can do to a system, i dont no mabe it has something to do with the last two ps systems being the most popular consoles on the market at that time

Congrats to Sony for reaching this milestone. Lets not forget that they're only 6 million units behind the 360 in WW sales. All of this "my console sold more than you" deal is played out. Lets just give credit where credit is due and just enjoy the system(s) that you have. Getting upset over something so trivial as console sales does nothing for you. Play your games and enjoy them regardless which system they may be on.

Ugh..site is slow...

But yeah, OK more behind PS2 by that metric. PS2 is Sony's unique victory. Said it before and will say it again: to call consoles that fall short of PS2 "failures" or whatever is BS.  That's my point in general.  So even IF PS3 and 360 have sold slower than PS2 (or Wii), they're not falures for that reason, etc.  These are businesses we are talking about, here.  Companies like profits even if they'd always prefer more.  [By the way, why not use worldwide figures still? I wonder. If there were supply issues for one console more than the other, that's a negative for the console with supply issues. No free passes for "not released in certain regions" when the real reason is "didn't have the infrastructure to produce it".]

Since PS3 will generate Blu-Ray royalties and video/game download sales by gen end, PS3 will be very successful. Games independently: also very succesful.

The existence of PS2 just means that Sony pwned the world back then. Anything less is a failure? Seriously, there are few words for the blatant fanboy FUD behind that logic.  Yet it keeps popping up.

I don't know. Blu-ray royalties are expected to be much less then DVD as a number of companys were fighting back at how overpirced DVD royalties were... a standard deal with signficantly less royalties will be likely needed if blu-ray wants non sony movie studios to get on board with the majority of their movies... and Sony owns less then half of the rights to blu-ray royalties.

Blu-ray will make money, but it will be nowhere near the level that DVDs or CDs made people. 

That's the risk you run with Loss Leading... if you lose, you lose big... Sony luckily can afford it unlike Sega.

Then again it may make Blu-ray look like less of a failure.  They aren't selling really outside of the PS3... even after running HD-DVD out of the market.